A young man transforms into a brutal warrior as he travels the unforgiving landscape in search of his long lost brother, Hakan the Ferrocious, whose people are relying on him to restore order to their kingdom.
An Indian girl conducts a social experiment where her friends must each try to live on only $300 US dollars for a month. The film highlights how to survive despite monetary constraints and concludes with surprising results.
The movie is set in a stately old home in Birmingham, Alabama. The story revolves around efforts by assorted sinister characters to seize control of the century-old mansion from the humble ... See full summary »
The all new unrated, unapologetic and uncensored Crusty Demons film! Get an all access pass to never before seen crashes, parties and jumps. Brand new footage & interviews from legendary ... See full summary »
A high energy, high concept, stylish action epic set in the Norse world sees a passionate young man transform into a brutal warrior as he travels the unforgiving British landscape in search of his long lost brother Hakan The Ferrocious who his people are relying on to restore order to their kingdom following the bloody death of their king. Written by
A Solid British Film No Less Historically Accurate than "Vikings".
I'm Welsh, so forgive me if I fail the US spell-check.
Firstly I'm bewildered, amused and dismayed by many of the comments: "Funny British Accents" (they're English accents), followed up by "Would be OK in Trainspotting II" (which is a Scottish film with Scottish accents), yes there are three countries in Great Britain. It's not called Great because it's great, it's to distinguish it from Brittany in France, formerly known as Little Britain after some Britons fled the Saxons and colonised the area. There's a bit of history for you.
Then we get into the historical accuracy of it all... and "Vikings" is held up as a better example, when most of "Vikings" is historically wrong.
Unlike "Vikings" this is a fantasy, it's not supposed to represent history, it's also not a Hollywood film, it's a "British" (English) one, that's why everyone talks with a "Funny British Accent".
There's also a fair amount of Old English and a snippet of Old Welsh, I don't think I've heard those languages used on film before.
It's main flaws are in trying to pander to the U.S. market (make it simpler and dumber)... yet it has strong performances throughout, a great lead in Charlie Bewley, fantastic settings, a solid although somewhat bipolar score, solid cinematography and a half-decent script.
People lap this stuff up in Game of Thrones yet as soon as you fix something which is obviously a fantasy to a point in history it get's pulled apart?
It's a solid 7. I'd have given it a 6 yet I find my patriotism roused by indignation at ignorance.
If you want to find something that completely lacks historical accuracy, only happened a couple of hundred years ago yet is revered as a great film, please watch Lincoln.
72 of 96 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?